Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-10-2010, 06:37 AM   #46
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bucharest
Posts: 482
I think they will milk the K-x as much as possible while evaluate the market needs/trends. Hoya-Pentax is clearly much more marketing savvy that PEntax alone was. They have the 645D worldwide launch to cater to so IMO there will be maybe a worldwide 645D release at photokina and maybe some teaser for a MILC/or prototype at the Pentax booth.

05-10-2010, 06:48 AM   #47
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Örebro
Posts: 207
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
Not 3 APS-C, just 2 APS-C. FF and 645D.
Since k-x and k7 is so similar (neither is really a super-high model), I want and EVIL camera, some people say Pentax lack digital FF-glass anyway and the other EVILs (panasonic & olympus = four-thirds, sony = aps-c, ..) have smaller sensors they could had dropped one of the aps-c's (the lower-end) and made the FF EVIL ;D
05-10-2010, 11:11 AM - 1 Like   #48
New Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 24
I agree with 24X36NOW

I agree about the FF market. The reason most people don't own one is the price. The reason I bought a Sony and the reason I am buying FF lenses to use on my a700 is the hopes I will be able to afford a FF body some day. I almost bought a 850 when it came out but it was still a little too much right now. Price is the only reason I don't have one. If the price was lower, I think many APS-C owners would already have one. If Pentax comes out with a FF, I will be switching from Sony. I am already considering it when the K-7 upgrade comes out. Right now Pentax offers some things that Sony doesn't. I haven't invested a lot in the Sony system yet. I'm holding off until I see what comes out later this year. I just think price is the main reason more people don't have a FF with any manufacturer.

My ideal system would be a FF camera as my main camera and a APS-C camera as my back-up when I need more reach. Lenses to fit both so I can interchange them between the two.

If the 645D was cheaper, I would like to have one of those too.

I remember when I graduated from Ohio Institute of Photography in 1987, I wanted a Pentax 6X7 or a Mamiya RZ. They taught us a professional used those over a 35mm. If you used a 35mm, you were an amateur. I couldn't afford one of the "pro" cameras then and still can't. The 645 digital is still out of reach for me and now so is the 35mm (FF). Things sure have changed. FF is now considered professional. I don't agree with all that anyway. You can be a professional with a APS-C camera. The quality is up there now. You don't have to spend $8,000 for a camera to be a pro. It is all in how you use the camera that is in front of you. Sure the high priced cameras have some features that the cheaper ones don't have but how many times do you need ISO 100,000+ ? Sometimes I think everyone worries about what their camera doesn't have instead of what it does have and taking it out and making some great images. I am one of those people I guess. There has to be some point when all of the cameras will be equal. They will run out of new things to add to them. Once the ISO and megapixels go as far as they can, what will happen then? Hopefully they will start lowering the prices to sell more cameras. That's when I will own a FF.
05-11-2010, 04:17 AM   #49
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 841
K200D was in it's essence a K10D in K100D outfit plus weather sealing. It had the same image processing pipeline as the K10D, but with added image tones and image features from the K20D.

K-x got several features from K-7, but in a K-m outfit with a new sensor.

There is room for an upgrade of K-7. K-x probably waits a while, it is still selling good.

05-11-2010, 04:43 AM   #50
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,294
QuoteOriginally posted by lol101 Quote
If my $250 EF 35F2 can make it, I have little doubts lenses such as the 31 would be in troubles...

I would certainly hope that the 31 LTD would make the transition to FF. The lens is about as well made as a film lens can possibly be made and the output on the current lineup of Pentax sensors is quite good.

That said, I have seen many nice Pentax lenses that I have owned not make that trasition particularly well to digital and the math on resolution to FF is rather daunitng.

Regardless, I would be hopeful that an opportunity will come where the tests can be performed on a FF Pentax boby.... the we will know for sure.

Best wishes,
Stephen
05-11-2010, 04:56 AM   #51
Pentaxian
Asahiflex's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,754
QuoteOriginally posted by SCGushue Quote
That said, I have seen many nice Pentax lenses that I have owned not make that trasition particularly well to digital and the math on resolution to FF is rather daunitng.
Stephen,

Care to give us some examples? You may well be right with regards to cheap consumer zooms, but nearly all K-mount primes and M42 glass will work extremely good on digital.

Remember: if the lenses were bad on film then these almost certainly are bad on digital.
05-11-2010, 12:39 PM   #52
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,294
QuoteOriginally posted by Asahiflex Quote
Stephen,

Care to give us some examples? You may well be right with regards to cheap consumer zooms, but nearly all K-mount primes and M42 glass will work extremely good on digital.

Remember: if the lenses were bad on film then these almost certainly are bad on digital.
Sure,

I usually don't get involved in the technical aspects of cameras and lenses, other than the fact that I check to make sure that they function within the parameters that I need to make my living.

I have been with Pentax for over thirty years now, and I have owned at least 60 or more lenses over 4 formats in that time.

I used my 15mm 3.5 without any problems on 35mm bodies and when the transition came to move over to digital (not professionally for the most part) I found that the lens simply could not produce sharp images on a sensor. So too was the problem with the non EDIF lenses 300, 400 and 500mm K and KA lenses.

The longer focal length lenses, while capable of sharp images, simply could not hand high contrast situations/transitions (now, I tried these on the 6MP cameras) and suffered from higher CA, PF, and a yellow/green color shift at sharp edges in contra light.

The other problem, and I'll leave this for those more measurbators minded than me, is that a full frame sensor would require a higher lines/mm for max sharpness. The demand of those sensors may not be met by the current level of resolution in the currently available 35mm lenses. Combine that with the physical lens requirement of a flat sensor and that would ideally mean a flat rear element. I am not sure how flat the current lens 35 mm lesnses are.

Comments with people in the know at Pentax seem to feel a new generation of full frame lenses would be needed if a FF happened to come along.

You might research out if Pentax's USA president made some comment on that in the past. While I never read what Ned said, I vaguely recall that he does not think that many lenses can professionally make the jump to FF.

My personal interest is whether or not the FA645 lenses can make the jump to the 645D format.

Not sure if this helps at all, but this is just what I have seen in my own work.


Stephen
05-11-2010, 12:57 PM   #53
Senior Member
Angevinn's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Chicago, Ill.
Posts: 205
Legacy Glass

Ned also has to tow the line for the parent company, Hoya/Pentax Japan. Do you remember what happened to the previous president of Leica when he announced a year in advance that the FF M9 was coming out? Sales nose dived and dealers were left with expensive cameras that no one wanted to buy, everyone waited for the FF model to come out. It cost the president his job too.

For those that argue that legacy glass does not work well on FF cameras, this myth is not true. Look on Flickr for samples taken with the Sony A850 & A900 and Canon 5D & 5D MkII, even the old M42 Carl Zeiss Jena and Meyer/Pentacon lenses produce some stunning images. Some are even taken with older single-coated lenses!

some examples:


Sony A900 FF + M42 Single-Coated Meyer-Optik Görlitz 50mm 1.8 Oreston


Canon 5D FF + M42 Tomioka Single-Coated (sold under Sears & Ricoh brands in US) 55mm 1.4


Canon 5D MkII FF + M42 SMC Takumar 85mm 1.8


Canon 5D FF + M42 SMC Takumar 85mm 1.8


Canon 5D FF + M42 (Single-Coated Zebra) Carl Zeiss Jena Pancolar 50mm 1.8

These are just a few samples. Some are better than others. I love my legacy glass but plan on buying more new lenses when Pentax brings out new D-FA lenses.

The older lenses definitely have a lot of character. I love shooting my old Nikon lenses on my Pentax DSLR!




QuoteOriginally posted by SCGushue Quote
Sure,

I usually don't get involved in the technical aspects of cameras and lenses, other than the fact that I check to make sure that they function within the parameters that I need to make my living.

I have been with Pentax for over thirty years now, and I have owned at least 60 or more lenses over 4 formats in that time.

I used my 15mm 3.5 without any problems on 35mm bodies and when the transition came to move over to digital (not professionally for the most part) I found that the lens simply could not produce sharp images on a sensor. So too was the problem with the non EDIF lenses 300, 400 and 500mm K and KA lenses.

The longer focal length lenses, while capable of sharp images, simply could not hand high contrast situations/transitions (now, I tried these on the 6MP cameras) and suffered from higher CA, PF, and a yellow/green color shift at sharp edges in contra light.

The other problem, and I'll leave this for those more measurbators minded than me, is that a full frame sensor would require a higher lines/mm for max sharpness. The demand of those sensors may not be met by the current level of resolution in the currently available 35mm lenses. Combine that with the physical lens requirement of a flat sensor and that would ideally mean a flat rear element. I am not sure how flat the current lens 35 mm lesnses are.

Comments with people in the know at Pentax seem to feel a new generation of full frame lenses would be needed if a FF happened to come along.

You might research out if Pentax's USA president made some comment on that in the past. While I never read what Ned said, I vaguely recall that he does not think that many lenses can professionally make the jump to FF.

My personal interest is whether or not the FA645 lenses can make the jump to the 645D format.

Not sure if this helps at all, but this is just what I have seen in my own work.


Stephen


05-11-2010, 01:04 PM   #54
Pentaxian
Asahiflex's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,754
QuoteOriginally posted by SCGushue Quote
Sure,

I usually don't get involved in the technical aspects of cameras and lenses, other than the fact that I check to make sure that they function within the parameters that I need to make my living.

I have been with Pentax for over thirty years now, and I have owned at least 60 or more lenses over 4 formats in that time.

I used my 15mm 3.5 without any problems on 35mm bodies and when the transition came to move over to digital (not professionally for the most part) I found that the lens simply could not produce sharp images on a sensor. So too was the problem with the non EDIF lenses 300, 400 and 500mm K and KA lenses.

The longer focal length lenses, while capable of sharp images, simply could not hand high contrast situations/transitions (now, I tried these on the 6MP cameras) and suffered from higher CA, PF, and a yellow/green color shift at sharp edges in contra light.

The other problem, and I'll leave this for those more measurbators minded than me, is that a full frame sensor would require a higher lines/mm for max sharpness. The demand of those sensors may not be met by the current level of resolution in the currently available 35mm lenses. Combine that with the physical lens requirement of a flat sensor and that would ideally mean a flat rear element. I am not sure how flat the current lens 35 mm lesnses are.

Comments with people in the know at Pentax seem to feel a new generation of full frame lenses would be needed if a FF happened to come along.

You might research out if Pentax's USA president made some comment on that in the past. While I never read what Ned said, I vaguely recall that he does not think that many lenses can professionally make the jump to FF.

My personal interest is whether or not the FA645 lenses can make the jump to the 645D format.

Not sure if this helps at all, but this is just what I have seen in my own work.


Stephen
Stephen,

Thank you very much for the clarification. I did not give examples of lenses that do not do well on digital because I wanted to see if this was from your own experience or just hearsay. But you passed the test summa cum laude

From my own experience: I know that hardly any longer K/M lenses (the non-ED ones) are usable. I hate CA and PF, so I never bought one of those
"drainpipes". I did try one old M42 400mm f/5.6 Tele-Takumar, but it was CA all over the place. I now have a Sigma 500/4.5 APO EX so I don't settle for less now.

Also, it's very true that few, if any, large wide angles pass the digital test. In my experience, only the 24mm lenses and up are usable. Many of Pentax's 20mm lenses show too much distortion (moustache distortion) and/or weak corners. The super wide angles were never meant to have high resolution, so it does not surprise me that the 15mm lenses are not up to par. I have never tested the SMC K18, so I don't know about that one.

Also, the 28mm f/3.5 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar is weak in the corners too.

But other than the lenses I wrote about above, many primes are more than adequate. I have many old M42 which are sharper and better built than any of the FA and DA lenses (the regular ones). The lens I like most is the 83mm f/1.9 Takumar, which dates from the 50's but is still a superb lens even on digital.

As for the 645 lenses: I'd like to know too, especially with regards to the A35mm and the A120mm macro (I have them, no FA's)
05-11-2010, 02:46 PM   #55
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,299
QuoteOriginally posted by 24X36NOW Quote
QuoteOriginally posted by Fl_Gulfer Quote
Why would they bother with a FF camera?
To help stop Pentax customers from becoming Nikon or Canon or Sony customers.
I totally disagree.
Pentax, over the last 12 months, has gained a lot of customers than losing to Nikon and Canon. Why? The success of K-x. Entry level plays a much larger role in market share.

Sony has a FF camera - so what?
2009 and 2010 so far has been disastrous for them - and not just the dismal sales of A900/A850, but their whole DSLR division. A FF Sony has not in any way stopped Sony or new customers becoming Nikon or Canon customers.

OTOH, their new NEX cameras would gain them A LOT MORE new Sony users than their A900/A850 ever had or ever will (either owning the camera or attracted to the brand because of it).

Looking at what's happened to Sony, Hoya would be very wise to stay away from FF.
05-11-2010, 02:49 PM   #56
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,080
QuoteOriginally posted by Asahiflex Quote
As for the 645 lenses: I'd like to know too, especially with regards to the A35mm and the A120mm macro (I have them, no FA's)
According to a recent Pentax interview most 645 lenses are up to the task. I'm pretty sure the 120 Macro is....
05-11-2010, 03:39 PM   #57
Senior Member
Angevinn's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Chicago, Ill.
Posts: 205
Sony Alpha is what Minolta was...

Pentax hasn't just had success with the K-X, but also the K-7. Entry level cameras are very important for manufacturers because it is often the starting point of many photographers to the respective camera manufacturer's system. As the photographer's skill grows they will often look to move up into more sophisticated, more professional camera models. Often from the same manufacturer.

Where can Pentax owner's move up after the APS-C K-7? It's easy from the APS-C K-x to the APS-C K-7, then what? The jump to the MF 645D is quite broad and steep. Pentax and many of it's users need a FF DSLR.

Sony had two FF cameras that were dogged by extremely high prices and poor sensor performance. People aren't dumb, they saw that and stayed away from the cameras (Sony A900 7 Sony A850). The next generation of FF sensors from Sony are rumored to be like the sensor in the Pentax K-X (sourced from Sony); very high on performance and much lower on price.

The Sony Alpha line is built upon the remains of the Minolta Camera division. Minolta is still around, so while Sony was able to purchase the camera division the Minolta name was not part of the sale.

I was never a fan of Minolta cameras or lenses, some of their cameras and manual focus lenses made the late 70's and early 80's were OK (like the 58mm 1.4), but their lenses (and coatings) were never as nice as Pentax, Nikon or Canon. From my work in college as a color darkroom manager I was not impressed with images taken on Minolta's (my opinion, I'm sure I will be dogged for this). Pentax has an awesome lens coating in the SMC, now Pentax is introducing digital and ghostless coatings. Quite impressive. Out of the standard 50mm 1.4 lenses from Nikon (G), Canon, Pentax (FA 50) and Sony (Minolta 1.4 50mm) the Sony is not that great.

Sony 50mm f/1.4 ( SAL-50F14 ) - Review / Test Report

Sony should have done their homework more before buying the Minolta camera division.

Another unfavorable Sony lens review (35mm 1.4 G):

Sony 35mm f/1.4 G ( SAL-35F14G ) - Review / Test Report

DPreview had an unflattering review of this lens too (very surprisingly) but when I just went back to look for it I could not find it. Maybe Sony had the plug pulled on the review. Advertising dollars have a lot of pull.

Sony hasn't been a complete failure. It takes awhile to establish a new division. The DSLR line is still relatively new for them. Sony makes some great Cybershot point and shoots.



QuoteOriginally posted by nosnoop Quote
I totally disagree.
Pentax, over the last 12 months, has gained a lot of customers than losing to Nikon and Canon. Why? The success of K-x. Entry level plays a much larger role in market share.

Sony has a FF camera - so what?
2009 and 2010 so far has been disastrous for them - and not just the dismal sales of A900/A850, but their whole DSLR division. A FF Sony has not in any way stopped Sony or new customers becoming Nikon or Canon customers.

OTOH, their new NEX cameras would gain them A LOT MORE new Sony users than their A900/A850 ever had or ever will (either owning the camera or attracted to the brand because of it).

Looking at what's happened to Sony, Hoya would be very wise to stay away from FF.
05-11-2010, 04:07 PM   #58
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,294
QuoteOriginally posted by Asahiflex Quote
Stephen,

Thank you very much for the clarification. I did not give examples of lenses that do not do well on digital because I wanted to see if this was from your own experience or just hearsay. But you passed the test summa cum laude

From my own experience: I know that hardly any longer K/M lenses (the non-ED ones) are usable. I hate CA and PF, so I never bought one of those
"drainpipes". I did try one old M42 400mm f/5.6 Tele-Takumar, but it was CA all over the place. I now have a Sigma 500/4.5 APO EX so I don't settle for less now.

Also, it's very true that few, if any, large wide angles pass the digital test. In my experience, only the 24mm lenses and up are usable. Many of Pentax's 20mm lenses show too much distortion (moustache distortion) and/or weak corners. The super wide angles were never meant to have high resolution, so it does not surprise me that the 15mm lenses are not up to par. I have never tested the SMC K18, so I don't know about that one.

Also, the 28mm f/3.5 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar is weak in the corners too.

But other than the lenses I wrote about above, many primes are more than adequate. I have many old M42 which are sharper and better built than any of the FA and DA lenses (the regular ones). The lens I like most is the 83mm f/1.9 Takumar, which dates from the 50's but is still a superb lens even on digital.

As for the 645 lenses: I'd like to know too, especially with regards to the A35mm and the A120mm macro (I have them, no FA's)
There are some nice lenses that have made the transition. I still use my M20/4 (color and contrast is unparalled), K24, and K35/3.5 (cannot part with it as it is phenomonel lens) and the K1000/11 (no PF or CA) all the other long lenses are EDIF.

QuoteOriginally posted by nosnoop Quote
I totally disagree.
Pentax, over the last 12 months, has gained a lot of customers than losing to Nikon and Canon. Why? The success of K-x. Entry level plays a much larger role in market share.

Sony has a FF camera - so what?
2009 and 2010 so far has been disastrous for them - and not just the dismal sales of A900/A850, but their whole DSLR division. A FF Sony has not in any way stopped Sony or new customers becoming Nikon or Canon customers.

OTOH, their new NEX cameras would gain them A LOT MORE new Sony users than their A900/A850 ever had or ever will (either owning the camera or attracted to the brand because of it).

Looking at what's happened to Sony, Hoya would be very wise to stay away from FF.
I don't think it would be a mistake for Pentax to move into the FF arena, though I have been known to be wrong on occasion Pentax has a long and storied history in SLR imaging, and Hoya appears to have done a remarkable job of resurrecting the brand. It would appear clear to me that the overt commitment to the 645D means a commitment to the future.

Once they have established the 645D as a success brand reputation takes another solid foothold in the marketplace. Those that wish to have a FF would certainly gravitate to Pentax providing that the preofessional support is there.... in lenses, wireless, and attachments.

If Hoya was not serious in competing for market share, they certainly would not be where they are now... growing.

Stephen

QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
According to a recent Pentax interview most 645 lenses are up to the task. I'm pretty sure the 120 Macro is....
I would assume so. I certainly hope so.

Ssteohen
05-11-2010, 07:55 PM   #59
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,299
QuoteOriginally posted by Angevinn Quote
Pentax hasn't just had success with the K-X, but also the K-7.
K-7 does OK, but probably more critical success than sales success. In the month of April 2010, K-7 ranks 55th and 69th in DSLR sales chart in Japan; despite price drop.

QuoteQuote:
Where can Pentax owner's move up after the APS-C K-7? It's easy from the APS-C K-x to the APS-C K-7, then what?
To be honest, K-7 has enough features for most users. And most people would not move beyond that category. Pentax can produce a 7D/D300 class camera if they want; but it would be a for a niche market. And the demand for moving up from APS-C to FF is simply too small - especially beyond the boundary of this forum and dpreview.

QuoteQuote:
Pentax and many of it's users need a FF DSLR.
Some users need or want a FF, but that's a minority; and not near enough volume to sustain the high cost development of FF.

QuoteQuote:
Sony had two FF cameras that were dogged by extremely high prices and poor sensor performance. People aren't dumb
And why would you assume Pentax FF would be well received? I won't be totally surprised by complaints about poor AF, banding, poor dynamic range... and it would probably be shredded to pieces by R*ce H*gh.

QuoteQuote:
Sony hasn't been a complete failure. It takes awhile to establish a new division. The DSLR line is still relatively new for them.
On the contrary, they had a great year in 2008 with A200/300/350. They hit a home run with those trio, establishing as a solid #3 in Japan. But somehow they made a blunder in their follow-ups, perhaps the most fatal was the lack of HD movies in their entire line-ups. It just shows how fast the industry can change, from riches to rags with a blink of the eye. This also happened to Pentax going from K10D/K100D to K20D/K200D/K-m.
05-11-2010, 08:46 PM   #60
Veteran Member
Pentaxie's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Kuala Lumpur Malaysia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 429
QuoteOriginally posted by nosnoop Quote
I totally disagree.
Pentax, over the last 12 months, has gained a lot of customers than losing to Nikon and Canon. Why? The success of K-x. Entry level plays a much larger role in market share.

Sony has a FF camera - so what?
2009 and 2010 so far has been disastrous for them - and not just the dismal sales of A900/A850, but their whole DSLR division. A FF Sony has not in any way stopped Sony or new customers becoming Nikon or Canon customers.

OTOH, their new NEX cameras would gain them A LOT MORE new Sony users than their A900/A850 ever had or ever will (either owning the camera or attracted to the brand because of it).

Looking at what's happened to Sony, Hoya would be very wise to stay away from FF.
Yes, I agreed with nosnoop's comments.
The entry level as well as affordbility plays a major part in capturing the dSLR market.

As for the FF market, IMO , the reason most people don't own one is the price. Price is the only reason I don't have one. If the price was lower, I think many APS-C owners would already own one.
If Pentax comes out with a FF, I think I will be one of the early one to get it. I just think price is the main reason why many people do not own a FF with any manufacturer.

IIMO, I would like to have a FF camera as my main camera and a APS-C camera as back-up. Lenses to fit both bodies so I can interchange them.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
k7, pentax news, pentax rumors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Pentax Flagship Camera SF1 SF-1 Body with Body Cap, Battery, and Original Manu yyyzzz Sold Items 6 03-15-2010 11:54 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax F 70-210mm 4-5.6 and Pentax F 35-70mm 3.5-4.5 Macro and SF1 camera Body jjdgti Sold Items 5 12-30-2009 12:25 PM
For Sale - Sold: FS: Pentax SF7-body / AF400FTZ / 3 Pentax-F lenses / GENUINE Pentax-accessori frederik9111 Sold Items 7 03-23-2008 03:00 PM
For Sale - Sold: FS: Pentax K1000 (Body only)+body cap+leather case+ strap Not Registered Sold Items 3 11-02-2007 07:51 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:19 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top